cliffy

My side view mirrors work good just like when towing my trailer :-) Couldn't get to the airport today maybe tomorrow.

I'll see if I can get a photo today It works great!

midlifeflyer- Thanks for bringing me up to date Makes sense. As I said, I didn't remember more than what I said.

Just posted a way to stop cold air from the baggage area with a foam plug between the rear seat and the headliner. Works great!

Found a way to stay lots warmer in my short body D. Have always had cold air coming from the baggage area forward to the front. Great in the summer but in the winter a different story. Made a paper pattern of the area between the top of the rear seat (bench type) and the ceiling radius. Then I cut a 4" thick foam pad to about 1" bigger all around than the pattern. By carefully pushing into the back seat area it stays in place by itself. What a big difference. Now the cabin heater keeps us warm. Much better than before. No more draft from the back.

How much of the USA debt payments to China (who is buying our huge debt) is paying for all this growth in Chine-Mooney included?

I read somewhere a couple of years ago (don't know if it is still valid) that the FAA frowned on LLCs as the purpose of it was to "provide transportation" and the LLC was not a 135 carrier. Someone may know more about this here. Seems there was mention of an FAA legal interpretation on it.

A thought just came to mind as I was reading this- Why not just have a requirement to have a cabin placard stating something like "Non-certified equipment installed in this aircraft" just like "experimental" in those aircraft. Has this ever been tossed at the FAA? As stated above- under 6000 lbs gross limitation.

With realistic MTBF numbers, maybe on the factor of 60 min ETOPS ops, this would be more than ample to have as part of a rewrite of certification standards. To restrict this (and the autopilot) to experimental aircraft only is a crime.

If you are going tor your medical just remember- D E F P O T E C is the 20/20 line. Just make it seem slightly difficult when you recite it! ;-) :-)

Liability comes in many forms one of which is complaints to Congress and public embarrassment in the news. Bureaucratic heads have rolled with such lately but I do agree that by changing the qualification regime to use some of the new stuff would be just as safe if not more so than the system we have now.

Forgot to add DaV8or I've got some JFK stories in 727s that you would love :-) Sorry don't want to hijack this thread

You won't get certification easing until you get no liability for the FAA. It will never happen as long as they can be sued for allowing it. Someone will always blame the FAA for allowing you to use non-certified equipment even if you drive into a mountain in clear weather.

Think back to where Al Mooney built airplanes in the 50s- the hill country of Texas, not exactly the airplane manpower mecca of post war LA or Seattle. Welding steel tube was easy compared to getting castings and forgings done in the back country of Texas then. Also it's fairly light weight compared. Think about push pull rods and one big arm to put it up and down compared to Beech's electric system even back then.

Someone put a lot of effort into this site Best one I have found yet. Still reading it http://www.angelflightmidatlantic.org/wp-content/uploads/ADS-B_presentation.pdf

You don't show it but do you have the elevator servos and hookup brackets for the alt hold also?

Back in the old days as they say- it was pilot, copilot and flight engineer. Navigators went they way of prop airplanes over water. The F/E handled all of the a/c systems as is done automatically now in 2 man cockpits. The two pilots handled all the other flying stuff even back then. ADS-B was written as a "one plan fits all" system from 747s in the air to ground vehicles on the airport. Yes, all ground vehicles on the major airports will be equipped with ADS-B out also. Why do you suppose they need a WAAS requirement on ADS-B? For the ground vehicles in low vis conditions. Then again, a WAAS motor really is not expensive to the equipment manufacturers when bought in quantity. The requirement for a "single point of entry of the transponder code" is one of the hindrances to a portable unit as is the way the OUT antenna requirement is written. Secondly, the FAA may have an issue with the fact that with ADS-B THEY no longer own the equipment to perform the "location" aspect of the traffic separation equation (they owned and controlled the RADAR system). We do in our airplanes with the OUT solution, therefore, the onerous and expensive certification requirements.

What a breath of fresh air this thread is! WOW, I thought I was the only dinosaur worried about the pervasive intrusion of automation in the cockpit. While I am not against "automation" I am against mandated and institutionalized requirements for its use to the detriment of piloting skills. I come from and remember doing engine out ADF approaches in training in 727s to doing GA LPV GPS approaches today. Both can be done safely. Steam gauges and levers to to triple redundant autopilots with 600 RVR auto-land capability. The problem comes from relying on all the automation and not keeping piloting skills. As was mentioned, pilots turn on A/Ps early and turn them off late in the approach. This is mandated by the training policies of the airplane manufacture and the airline (Airbus in particular, yes I'm rated in the 320). A/Ps are generally more accurate and cheaper to fly with them on than off. Hence the cost issue. The real effect has been documented in the recent crash in KSFO of the 777. Way back when, the 757 was called the "widow maker" as the automation was almost undecipherable for many of the 727 drivers who were upgrading. And this was the first generation "glass" cockpit. Not near as complicated as today's glass and automation. The biggest most often heard cockpit comment then was "what the H@#$ is this thing doing now"! It's no different today except that many younger pilots have grown up with "electronics" making the transition much easier but the possibility of loss of hand flying skills more probable. "Buttonology" is the big issue today. Even back in the 757 days it took conscious effort not to be "head down" all the time playing with the box. No different today. Syn vision only exasperates the heads down issue by making watching TV more important than looking out the window. Yes, it happens. I have a friend who does contract training for many different entities and he sees it every day even with experienced pilots. He sees hand flying skills deteriorating rapidly as automation and GOOD autopilots take over more and more of the flying duties even in small GA aircraft. Add to the mix the limited amount of actual recent IFR flying hours for the average IR GA pilot and now they have a good A/P and TV screen and they blast off into maybe stuff they shouldn't and it spells trouble. The glass may give a false sense of capability and security. It is what it is. Glass and automation can be real good or real bad. It all depends on the mind set of the pilot in wanting to be as good as possible and that includes hand flying skills. Frankly I could write pages on this subject but I'll not bore you with my diatribe. There are some really smart pilots who have contributed to this thread.

Make a deal with the owner to clean it and fly it and take him along once and a while. Maybe offer to have the oil changed etc for the ability to fly it once and a while. OBTW, tell him you pay the insurance ( maybe even tie down) and get a professional Mooney check out too. Just might work.

Had one in Page AZ a couple of years ago giving rides at the Air Fair. On the first trip around the pattern they blew a cylinder on the right motor. The barrel separated from the base and hung there. It was all they could do to get to the runway as at that altitude (DA of around 7500') it was going downhill on two going flat out.

110 to 130/ yr for 14 years All pleasure no business

As far as Canada is concerned, ADS-B is only above FL290 and in the Hudson Bay area with no plans to do more at this time. Mexico has no plans for GA planes at this time AS far as I can determine (please correct me if you know and can show hard data, I've looked and can't find any other conclusion). Europe is another story all together! ES is only required if you actually go FL180 and above in the USA after the drop dead date. Whether it impacts your resale is a financial question not a legality question. I haven't gained any knowledge about Canadian registered airplanes without ADS-B coming down here after the drop dead date. The "gains" we will see in the "IN' side are far outweighed by the costs. Even the TSO addresses this by specifically stating so. Obviously I'm not a big fan of ADS-B as it is written in the TSO (which I have read cover to cover) or its implementation by the FAA. The TSO was written for a "one size fits all" and if it had been done to account for differing aircraft capabilities we would have a much lower cost of entry. The biggest issue as I see it is that the FAA now wants to have an aircraft separation system (remember, ATC is for a/c separation) that now they don't control the "location" aspect, we do by owning the ADS-B out solution, unlike with RADAR that they owned.

SA is a cool place to visit and travel. Have been 5 times and want more. Interesting history also.

Have never been to that part of your country Very nice!

Cool trip! We've been to SA 5 times although never to the west coast. Have neighbors who just got back from Cape Town trip last week. Great country to visit Lots to see and do.